JonathanK

Just above where it says "In from Baseline". It says "Upper Pitch". That should match the same pitch as your house.

For the record...you could have had this roof banged out, done, and moved on to other projects in about 15 minutes if you did it manually. And adjusting it later is easy as well...so I don't know what the hang up is. Just because there's auto-build, doesn't mean you should use it.

You need to adjust your "in from baseline" number. That's what pushes the steeper roof pitch back. Get it so that it lines up with your main roof. Either by trial and error, or by....well...probably trial and error will be the easiest. And make sure that your Upper Pitch matches what the main roof is. Right now it looks like it's shallower.

Make the pitch of the cricket what it actually needs to be. Don't make it 0.

I'm going to have to try this out...never thought of that.

Just quickly looking through, there is this option. If you know the pitch of your cricket (roof between gables), and you do some math on where it switches pitch, you can get it to line up correctly. But I'm still 100% on board with just doing this roof manually...

Whew...with auto is gnarly. Maybe break a little 3"-6" section and change that little section to hip? I would definitely draw it manual...not sure why you would HAVE to draw it auto. It would be easier to change down the road doing it all manual anyways. EDIT: Just tested it, and it needs to be a 6" chunk.

Definitely a point marker user...my only wish is that you could "snap" them to the corner of the structure. They will snap on elevations, but not on the floor plans. But getting close works as well.

My email and phone line are waiting for Chief to reach out I don't love the manual way either, but it's clear that our team needs to do something different. Funny how it's never really been a problem until I stop and think about it. Like...how would truss manufacturers know what heel height is?!

@robdyck, 100%! I have found even sometimes simple roofs won't show the heel height correctly...if even at all! I'm all-in for rocking the boat a little to make them think of a different and more accurate way to report heel heights. I would even...dare I say...consider getting rid of "Baseline Height" and only having heel height. For our company, and our industry, this would be an absolute game-changer. Being able to just show our truss suppliers what the heel height needs to be quickly and easily would eliminate many many potential issues. For the guys out there wanting to make stairs better...meh...they probably could care less about heel heights

Thanks all for chiming in. I actually emailed Chief, and got the same response. They will be logging a feature request. This would save us a tremendous amount of time and effort on our roof plans!...and eliminate errors for our truss manufacturers.

Just wondering if the macro guru's out there have a way of making a label for roof planes like this: Where everything is pulled from the roof plane itself, and not manually typed...

Could you find a good repeatable "breaking point" and just make one panel that includes the balusters and the custom panel? Then you don't have to try and break and do funkyness. Meaning...what if you make this section in red one panel. That's your repeat, set that as your custom panel and then it should work?...

Here's what it looks like with a light source directly on it.

Is this what you're looking for?Wood Vinyl Soffit - Center Vent.calibz I just found a center vent soffit material in CA, found the texture, dropped it in AI and told it to add wood grain and keep all other aspects the same, and changed the mapping of the texture to include the new one AI created. Added the texture to library and attached it here for your pleasure... Not too complicated.

Are you using any terrain breaks? In the past, I've "ignored" the retaining wall tool, and just used terrain breaks and elevation lines/regions to get my terrain correct. Then used solids to get my retaining walls. Finally, make sure that your sidewalks are thick enough that your grass region isn't going to "bleed through" onto it.

Thanks, all. I’ll probably submit a suggestion to make these editable independently of each other. We don’t do a ton of them, but I would rather edit everything through the door DBX, rather than placing this piece or that piece. That’s not scalable for multiple users working with the software. I can make the custom track with the 1x mounting board, but I would like to be able to make that any length I want separately from the door slab.

Thanks, Joe. The problem with the lintel is that you cannot specify it being offset to one side or the other. So I made a custom track that has the lintel built in...but now there is this issue...

Is there a way to control a barn door slab width separately from the track above? Typically when we do barn doors, we have a 1x8 mounted to the wall, that the track mounts to. I want that to be a specific width (74-1/2" wide). But I want the slab of my door to be a specific width as well (36" wide). If I set my door so that that width is correct, it makes my track too short. If I set it so that my track is the right width...my door is too wide. See attached...

I agree with you, but it would be amazing to see something big like that get an update. Lets move into 2026...

Why is this so hard for you to understand? Have you not read through the blog that CA Staff posted, specifically the benchmarks: https://www.chiefarchitect.com/blog/computer-for-design-and-gaming/#real-time-ray-tracing I agree with you regarding AI...but only regarding FINAL IMAGES. It takes me longer to generate a 3D view through AI than it does to bang out a quick PBR view for a customer to review through email. Plain and simple... But I also agree with you regarding them focusing on other items (except material lists). I have always been frustrated with the amount of cabinet tools and libraries that CA has, but a lack of window tools that they have. Why don't windows have more control over sashes, frames, jambs etc.. like how a window is actually built? Doesn't make sense to me. Same with OH doors, or walk doors, or a pile of other things like you mentioned. How about elevation views...why can't I have only the outline of the building be bold?...why is terrain so fickle?...etc...

You're right, for an interior it's more like 5 seconds for it to completely clear, but exteriors are pretty quick. Like 3.5 seconds. But I can roll around in PBR and it's always clear enough that I can see what I'm doing or where I'm going.

I have the 5070Ti. Love it.

While I agree on the stance of AI, I personally do not want CA to remove or not focus on the PBR engine. I still send many, many views out to clients utilizing this over AI. Will that change in the future, Not sure. But the prompting needed for AI takes far longer than it does to shoot some 3D views in PBR and move along. But I'm also using a PC with a 5070Ti, not a Mac. So I can crank a PBR picture out in about 3 seconds. Maybe if I was on Mac I'd feel differently...

Maybe I'm not understanding issue #1 fully, but can't you just open the wall in question, click on the "Roof" tab, and check "Lower Wall Type if Split by Butting Roof"? Set that as your Interior wall type, and move on down the line...